Many very diverse methods have been tested for the production of recombinant molecules of interest and commercial value. Different organisms that have been considered as hosts for foreign protein expression include single celled organisms such as bacteria and yeasts, cells and cell cultures of animals, fungi and plants and whole organisms such as plants, insects and transgenic animals.
The use of fermentation techniques for large scale production of bacteria, yeasts and higher organism cell cultures is well established. The capital costs associated with establishment of the facility and the costs of maintenance are negative economic factors. Although the expression levels of proteins that can be achieved are high, energy inputs and protein purification costs can greatly increase the cost of recombinant protein production.
The production of a variety of proteins of therapeutic interest has been described in transgenic animals, however the cost of establishing substantial manufacturing is prohibitive for all but high value proteins. Numerous foreign proteins have been expressed in whole plants and selected plant organs. Methods of stably inserting recombinant DNA into plants have become routine and the number of species that are now accessible to these methods has increased greatly.
Plants represent a highly effective and economical means to produce recombinant proteins as they can be grown on a large scale with modest cost inputs and most commercially important species can now be transformed. Although the expression of foreign proteins has been clearly demonstrated, the development of systems with commercially viable levels of expression coupled with cost effective separation techniques has been limited.
The production of recombinant proteins and peptides in plants has been investigated using a variety of approaches including transcriptional fusions using a strong constitutive plant promoter (e.g., from cauliflower mosaic virus (Sijmons et al., 1990, Bio/Technology, 8:217-221); transcriptional fusions with organ specific promoter sequences (Radke et al., 1988, Theoret. Appl. Genet., 75:685-694); and translational fusions which require subsequent cleavage of a recombinant protein (Vanderkerckove et al., 1989, Bio/Technology, 7:929-932).
Foreign proteins that have been successfully expressed in plant cells include proteins from bacteria (Fraley et al., 1983, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 80:4803-4807), animals (Misra and Gedamu, 1989, Theor. Appl. Genet., 78:161-168), fungi and other plant species (Fraley et al., 1983, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 80:4803-4807). Some proteins, predominantly markers of DNA integration, have been expressed in specific cells and tissues including seeds (Sen Gupta-Gopalan et al., 1985, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 82:3320-3324); Radke et al., 1988, Theor. Appl. Genet., 75:685-694). Seed specific research has been focused on the use of seed-storage protein promoters as a means of deriving seed-specific expression. Using such a system, Vanderkerckove et al., (1989, Bio/Technol., 7:929-932) expressed the peptide leu-enkephalin in seeds of Arabidopsis thaliana and Brassica napus. The level of expression of this peptide was quite low and it appeared that expression of this peptide was limited to endosperm tissue.
It has been generally shown that the construction of chimeric genes which contain the promoter from a given regulated gene and a coding sequence of a reporter protein not normally associated with that promoter gives rise to regulated expression of the reporter. The use of promoters from seed-specific genes for the expression of recombinant sequences in seed that are not normally expressed in a seed-specific manner have been described.
Sengupta-Gopalan et al., (1985, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 82:3320-3324) reported expression of a major storage protein of french bean, called β-phaseolin, in tobacco plants. The gene expressed correctly in the seeds and only at very low levels elsewhere in the plant. However, the constructs used by Sengupta-Gopalan were not chimeric. The entire β-phaseolin gene including the native 5′-flanking sequences were used. Subsequent experiments with other species (Radke et al., 1988, Theor. App. Genet. 75:685-694) or other genes (Perez-Grau, L., Goldberg, R. B., 1989, Plant Cell, 1:1095-1109) showed the fidelity of expression in a seed-specific manner in both Arabidopsis and Brassica. Radke et al., (1988, vide supra), used a “tagged” gene i.e., one containing the entire napin gene plus a non-translated “tag”.
The role of the storage proteins is to serve as a reserve of nitrogen during seed germination and growth. Although storage protein genes can be expressed at high levels, they represent a class of protein whose complete three-dimensional structure appears important for proper packaging and storage. The storage proteins generally assemble into mulfimeric units which are arranged in specific bodies in endosperm tissue. Perturbation of the structure by the addition of foreign peptide sequences leads to storage proteins unable to be packaged properly in the seed.
In addition to nitrogen, the seed also stores lipids. The storage of lipids occurs in oil or lipid bodies. Analysis of the contents of lipid bodies has demonstrated that in addition to triglyceride and membrane lipids, there are also several polypeptides/proteins associated with the surface or lumen of the oil body (Bowman-Vance and Huang, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262:11275-11279, Murphy et al., 1989, Biochem; J., 258:285-293, Taylor et al., 1990, Planta, 181:18-26). Oil-body proteins have been identified in a wide range of taxonomically diverse species (Moreau et al., 1980, Plant Physiol., 65:1176-1180; Qu et al., 1986, Biochem. J., 235:57-65) and have been shown to be uniquely localized in oil-bodies and not found in organelles of vegetative tissues. In Brassica napus (rapeseed, canola) there are at least three polypeptides associated with the oil-bodies of developing seeds (Taylor et al., 1990, Planta, 181:18-26).
The oil bodies that are produced in seeds are of a similar size (Huang A. H. C., 1985, in Modern Meths. Plant Analysis, Vol. 1:145-151 Springer-Verlag, Berlin). Electron microscopic observations have shown that the oil-bodies are surrounded by a membrane and are not freely suspended in the cytoplasm. These oil-bodies have been variously named by electron microscopists as oleosomes, lipid bodies and spherosomes (Gurr M I., 1980, in The Biochemistry of Plants, 4:205-248, Acad. Press, Orlando, Fla.). The oil-bodies of the species that have been studied are encapsulated by an unusual “half-unit” membrane comprising, not a classical lipid bilayer, but rather a single amphophilic layer with hydrophobic groups on the inside and hydrophillic groups on the outside (Huang, A. H. C., 1985, in Modern Meths. Plant Analysis, Vol. 1:145-151 Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
The numbers and sizes of oil-body associated proteins may vary from species to species. In corn, for example, there are two immunologically distinct polypeptide classes found in oil-bodies (Bowman-Vance and Huang, 1988, J. Biol. Chem., 263:1476-1481). Oleosins have been shown to comprise alternate hydrophillic and hydrophobic regions (Bowman-Vance and Huang, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262:11275-11279). The amino acid sequences of oleosins from corn, rapeseed, and carrot have been obtained. See Qu and Huang, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265:2238-2243, Hatzopoulos et al., 1990, Plant Cell, 2:457-467, respectively. In an oilseed such as rapeseed, oleosin may comprise between 8% (Taylor et al., 1990, Planta, 181:18-26) and 20% (Murphy et al., 1989, Biochem. J., 258:285-293) of total seed protein. Such a level is comparable to that found for many seed storage proteins.
Genomic clones encoding oil-body proteins with their associated upstream regions have been reported for several species, including maize (Zea mays, Bowman-Vance and Huang, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262:11275-11279; and Qu Huang, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265:2238-2243) and carrot (Hatzopoulos et al., 1990, Plant Cell, 2:457-467). cDNAs and genomic clones have also been reported for cultivated oilseeds, Brassica napus (Murphy, et al., 1991, Biochem. Biophys. Acta, 1088:86-94; and Lee and Huang, 1991, Plant Physiol 96:1395-1397), sunflower (Cummins and Murphy, 1992, Plant Molec. Biol. 19:873-878) soybean (Kalinski et al., 1991, Plant Molec. Biol. 17: 1095-1098), and cotton (Hughes et al., 1993, Plant Physiol 101:697-698). Reports on the expression of these oil-body protein genes in developing seeds have varied. In the case of Zea mays, transcription of genes encoding oil-body protein isoforms began quite early in seed development and were easily detected 18 days after pollination. In non-endospermic seeds such as the dicotyledonous plant Brassica napus (canola, rapeseed), expression of oil-body protein genes seems to occur later in seed development (Murphy, et al., 1989, Biochem. J., 258:285-293) compared to corn.
A maize oleosin has been expressed in seed oil bodies in Brassica napus transformed with a Zea mays oleosin gene. The gene was expressed under the control of regulatory elements from a Brassica gene encoding napin, a major seed storage protein. The temporal regulation and tissue specificity of expression was reported to be correct for a napin gene promoter/terminator (Lee et al., 1991, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 88:6181-6185).
Thus the above demonstrates that oil body proteins (or oleosins) from various plant sources share a number of similarities in both structure and expression. However, at the time of the above references it was generally believed that modifications to oleosins or oil body proteins would likely lead to abherant targeting and instability of the protein product. (Vande Kerckhove et al., 1989. Bio/Technology, 7:929-932; Radke et al., 1988. Theor. and Applied Genetics, 75:685-694; and Hoffman et al., 1988. Plant Mol. Biol. 11:717-729).